Archive for March, 2011

Unfortunately, he didn’t take any classes while speaking from National Defense University- and God knows he could use a couple. We could focus on why he didn’t speak from the Oval Office, the place from which every other President has explained our military engagements to the American people, but the answer is pretty easy- he’s not comfortable there. He needs to move, stretch out that frame, grip the podium, and besides, he can’t see the teleprompter at his desk…

No, where the speech was given pails in importance when compared to what the speech said, so let us begin…

Obama told us that had we not intervened in Libya, the stability of the entire region would have been shaken. Really? I know he’s been busy vacationing in South America and hitting the links with the nice weather, but is this really why we’re in Libya- to keep the region stable?

The Middle East and North Africa have been en fuego for about three months now. I’d like to think he knew that, which is why we toss the flag.

He then defended this premise with the rebels. We can’t have Qadhafi killing the rebels and creating a refugee crisis for Tunisia and Egypt… except that we already have a refugee crisis of Libyians in Tunisia and Egypt. It’s all about timing. But more importantly, who are these rebels that demand our blood sweat and tears in defense?

Well, we know that at least one of the rebel commanders, Abdul-Hakim al-Hasadi, fought US forces in Afghanistan and was responsible for recruiting and sending more fighters than anyone else to Iraq. In al-Hasadi’s home town of Darnah, the radio cries out, “Dear brothers who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan… now is the time to defend your land!”

Of course, they’re just misunderstood… right?

“Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different,” Obama said. “And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.“

Let’s see here, if I had to point towards two of the biggest problem states in the Middle East, the two states most responsible for instability and failure to achieve Middle East peace with Israel, the two states most active in sponsoring and promoting terrorist organizations of all stripes, the two states that pose the greatest risk to the United States and its allies, those two states would be Syria and Iran. And this President has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about it. What’s sad is that Obama got a Mulligan- a little golf lingo for the Golfer-in-Chief- on Iran. He abjectly failed in 2009 to back the protest movement, a movement far more democratically focused than ANYTHING we’ve see in the current Middle East crisis, yet he did nothing.

And Yemen, really? Can you say al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula? Remember Hasan Nidal, Christmas Day bomb plot, or the Parcel bomb plot? How about the recent news that AQAP took control of a strategic town near Aden and the Ammunition factory that went with it? How many rounds of ammo do you think were “liberated” before the factory caught fire?

Obama said that in times of justifiable intervention, we should not be afraid to act. Well, then why have you not acted in Iran, Syria, and Yemen? Do they not deserve the same standard that Libya seems to enjoy?

The President continued, “The democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power. The writ of the U.N. Security Council would have been shown to be little more than empty words, crippling its future credibility to uphold global peace and security.“

Ah, dawning democracy. So poetic, yet so much bullshit. A case in point, Egypt. We on the right warned, repeatedly, that there has to be concern about the Muslim Brotherhood. That what was occurring on the ground in Egypt was looking very, very similar to that of Iran in 1979. Liberals cried foul and Obama threw Hosni Mubarak under the bus. Well, that secular movement of youths yearning for democracy- bye bye. I’d say told you so, but this is getting a bit repetitive…

As for showing dictatorships that violence was not the answer to popular protests (see Iran), well, he’s about 18 months late for that now isn’t he.

And the United Nations. This very same argument was used for Iraq, and Obama vehemently opposed the war. Why is it good enough for military conflict in a state that the US has no interest, but it is not good enough for a state that the US has enormous interest?

Obama promised that, “The risk and cost of this operation — to our military and to American taxpayers — will be reduced significantly.”

Because NATO is really in a position to handle the conflict. I don’t buy this for a second. Intervention is expensive. Libya, in its first week of military action, has already cost $600 million dollars. I’m not really sure why we’re not demanding Europe pay us back, considering it is in their interest, not ours. Obama has consistently failed to point out how this is in our national interest. And from a messaging standpoint, the Administration is all over the place. Obama is saying Qadhafi has to go, but Gates and Admiral Mullen disagree. Obama calls Libyian intervention in our interest, but Gates clearly states that it is not.

And really, this is winding down? Gates was asked point blank if military operations might be over by the years end- nine months from now- and his answer was, “I don’t think anybody knows the answer to that.” We just committed AC-130 and A-10 gunships to attacking Libyian regime ground forces. They ain’t cheap, are desperately needed in Afghanistan and Iraq and are by the very nature of their mission, inherently more at risk to enemy fire. Yet we’re winding down.

The fact of the matter is that no one knows why we are conducting military operations against Libya. The intervention has been superficially shrouded in humanitarian concerns, yet the mission has simply not been articulated to the American people. Just from listening to the Administration explain itself, its not even clear the Administration is united on what the hell is going on in Libya.

I said this a couple of weeks ago in a discussion about Libya. I think it still stands:

You asked on the last thread what I thought of Libya, well, I think its a mistake to be involved right now, and I think that for a couple reasons.

1) The devil you know versus the devil you don’t know. Who are the rebels? The primary tribal faction against Qaddafi is Salafist. Supporting the rebel movement is the Libyian Islamic Fighters Group- an ally of al-Qaida. Is it really our intent to help out the allies of al-Qaida?

2) What’s in it for us? Sounds selfish, but that’s the whole point of diplomacy and conflict. You don’t do either unless you’re getting something out of it. So, what’s in it for us? Oil? All of it goes to Europe and we couldn’t refine it if we wanted to. Qaddafi removed? The alternative is what to make this worth while? Revenge? We’re about four weeks too late to be effective with that premise…

3) Focus. We’re busy. No, really, we’re really fucking busy. Fighting season in Afghanistan is about to kick off, we’re trying to wind down Iraq and, oh by the way, the Middle East is on fire. Of course, this doesn’t include the host of domestic issues that Obama Van Winkle seems to be sleeping through. Do we really care about Libya right now?

4) Why are we there? Obama says it is US policy that Qaddafi goes. ADM Mullen (CJCS) says he can stay. Obama says that while it is US policy for Qaddafi to go, the military objective is humanitarian (which I’m not sure how you do without boots on the ground). There is this guy called Clauswitz, you should read some of his stuff.

“No one starts a war–or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so–without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it.”

“War is not a mere act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political activity by other means.”

So, what’s the end game and why is that end game not being articulated to the American people?

So, at a certain event last Friday, I was approached by a kind old lady promoting the local chapter of the Tea Party. She handed me some literature and gave my boy a balloon, and we both went our merry way. A couple days later, I managed to sit down and read the pamphlet she gave me. Amazingly, there was nothing racist in it or- for that matter- violent. However, it did have some pretty interesting concepts laid out as their Core Principles:

1.Unalienable rights of the individual, as endowed by our Creator.

2.Constitutionally limited government.

3.Adherence to original documents and intent of the America’s founders.

4.Fiscal responsibility.

5.The Rule of Law.

6.Personal responsibility and individual charity.

7.National sovereignty and American Exceptionalism.

8.Free market economy.

9.Protection of equality, regardless of race, sex or creed.

10.Accountability and transparency of all governing entities.

Not overly complicated premises and something that nearly every American can agree on. Unfortunately, this Administration has demonstrably broken every single one of these principles, and it has done it with a callous disregard for the people of this nation. The concept seems to be difficult for liberals to understand, but there would be no Tea Party today without the election, and subsequent governing of Barack Obama. It has been his Administration and his policies that have brought us to where we are today, which frankly, is pretty damn close to the side of a cliff.

But first, let us examine the various violations to these principles.

1. Unalienable rights… Aside from repeatedly forgetting our Creator, this of the Core Principles, has been the most violated. It is really a collection of abuse, some of which noted below, that amount to an insurmountable body of evidence that demonstrates a complete and total disregard for a chief component of American Exceptionalism: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. From the mountains of debt to the Constitutional neglect, this Administration has repeatedly violated our unalienable rights.

2. Constitutionally limited government… Obamacare is the antithesis of Constitutionally limited government. It has been found Unconstitutional in Federal court, and is being appealed to the 11th Circuit, but it will undoubtedly make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court for a final ruling. The scope and breadth of the individual intrusions built into this Orwellian law is mind numbing. It is a clear abuse of the Commerce Clause and a direct violation of the 10th Amendment, it is- and has remained- wildly unpopular, yet the Administration rammed it down the peoples throat anyway. So much for Representative government.

3. Original documents and intent… History and law courses will be taught on the various, and vast, abuses to our founding documents and the intent of our Founding Fathers in the establishment of this nation. Granted, the road was being built before Obama took office, but the efficiency and speed of destruction that he has applied is without equal. Limited government is a concept that he abjectly refuses to entertain. The sovereignty of States and their mandated supremacy on issues not specifically addressed in the Constitution over the Federal Government is loathed by this Administration.

4. Fiscal responsibility… Frankly, this Administration has failed so utterly at fiscal responsibility that it is hardly anything new to anyone. But it is important to understand some key numbers. Our National Debt, which currently stands at $14.2 Trillion dollars is growing by $4 Billion dollars PER DAY. Our monthly deficit for February was $223 Billion dollars, which, by way of comparision, is approximately $80 Billion dollars more than the annual deficit of 2007. When the Federal debt obligation is combined with the personal debt obligation, on average, the total debt per citizen is $177,720 dollars. At the end of 2007, our national debt was 9,229,172,659,218.31. As of today, it is 14,224,862,420,919.33, which is a 54% increase in just four years.

5. Rule of Law… There are a couple of examples of this, but I’ll concentrate on just one- the Defense of Marriage Act. We have a system of government made up of three branches. One- Congress- writes the laws, another- the President- enforces the laws and the third- the Supreme Court- ensures that those laws, and/or their enforcement are within the guidelines of the Constitution. Obama’s unilateral announcement that he wasn’t going to defend a Constitutionally passed law because he had decided it was unconstitutional is, well, unconstitutional. He doesn’t get to decide what laws are, or are not, Constitutional. Period. End of discussion. He is Constitutionally obligated to enforce and defend the laws of this nation, whether he likes them or not. There is a process for changing laws, he doesn’t get to change that.

6. Personal responsibility and individual charity… It is hard to talk about personal responsibility with this Administration. Well, that is of course unless you are wealthy, which means you make close to, but it’s really undefined, a couple hundred grand a year. Then, of course, you have a personal responsibility to redistribute your wealth to others, which really means the unions. This Administration is ever trying to get the average person dependent on the government, whatever form that may take.

7. National sovereignty and American Exceptionalism… Of course, border security is synonymous with sovereignty. You cannot claim to be a sovereign territory if you can’t even control your own territory. So when Obama decided to sue the state of Arizona for essentially doing the job the fed refuses to do, well, he more or less announced his intent to not respect our national sovereignty. Likewise, Obama’s early Global Apology Tour was directed specifically at undermining the concept of American Execptionalism. For Obama, it is better to be average, or even below average (which probably says more about his unreleased academic records than anything) than to think highly of oneself.

8. Free market… From Government Motors, to the massive bank take over through TARP, to the constant incorporation of political thugs, A.K.A. unions, into national policy- this Administration has constantly undermined free market principles. Union bosses brag about speaking to the White House daily, and the White House was assisting unions in Wisconsin against the Governor. Of course, what could one expect, the unions said they’d get their money back and Obama has constantly worked in their favor over the betterment of the nation.

9. Protection of equality… I had mentioned earlier in Rule of Law that there were a couple of examples, and while this would have fit nicely there, it is more applicable here: the Black Panther Voter Intimidation case. The Administration’s failure to prosecute, what was essentially a slam dunk case, and the subsequent revelations that this failure to prosecute was based on a policy of racist undertones obviously conflicts with the notion of equality. The constant meme early on that Obama was going to be a post-racial president has been demonstrably false. From Obama’s immediate racial reaction to, and subsequent Beer-summit to his Attorney General Eric Holder’s people, this Administration has demonstrated that it is the most racially motivated Administration in at least the last century.

10. Accountability and transparency… The irony in Obama scheduling an award ceremony for transparency following a day’s worth of closed door meetings was not lost on most. Nor was the 308 days that went by in between Presidential press conferences in 2010. His last press conference, in Brazil, took no questions. Obama has more czars now than any other President in history. He even wants a czar to manage communications between the czars. Furthermore, the way in which Obamacare was passed (through back door deals in the dead of night and without even reading the bill- we have to pass it so you can see what’s in it…) demonstrates how serious- or not- this Administration takes transparency.

Issue after issue, principle after principle, this Administration has demonstrated consistently since it took office that it not only does not hold the interests of the nation at heart, but that it intends to transform the nation into something else.

The left can continue to throw mud on the wall in the desperate hope that something sticks to tarnish the image and subsequently cause the tea party movement to falter, but the 800 lb gorilla in the room is the simple fact that were it not for the Obama Administration, there would be no Tea Party. These principles, and the Administrations defile of such, define the ever growing fracture between We the People and the Administration.